Semiotic Weakening Law in Ancient Chinese Writing System and Divinations
https://doi.org/10.21603/sibscript-2024-26-4-587-596
Abstract
Academic publications on Chinese semiotics are less numerous than those on Indo-European semiotics. This article shows the mantic practices in ancient China from the perspective of the semiotic weakening law. The evolution of hieroglyphic signs cannot be studied separately from that of mantic practices. The basic mental categories of Chinese mentality originated in mantic practices and were fixed in hieroglyphic writing. This study is an attempt to unravel the evolutionary peculiarities of Chinese mentality, i.e., how mantic practices evolved into philosophy which, in its turn, crystallized as the ancient canonical text of The Book of Changes. As the current scientific interest to linguo-cultural codes continues to grow, this research provides an insight into the nature of human mind and hieroglyphic signs, as well as promotes effective intercultural communication. The study relied on the principles developed by C. S. Peirce, C. W. Morris, S. G. Proskurin, V. P. Vasiliev, L. S. Vygotsky, Yu. K. Shchutskii, D. N. Keightley, etc. Hieroglyphs associated with fortune-telling practices were subjected to the methods of grapheme and etymological analyses, as well as the methods of description and comparison, to study the connection of mantic and hieroglyphic systems. The mantic system revealed a ternary structure and three stages of weakening, i.e., identity, similarity, and convention. The main links of the process included cracking (primary), interpretation (secondary), and fixation (tertiary). The hieroglyphic system reflected the transformations of mantic practices, which gradually turned into a philosophical tradition of reading trigrams and hexagrams. The correlation between the two systems made it possible to understand how primitive mantic practices had evolved into philosophy.
About the Author
Daria S. LebedevaRussian Federation
Daria S. Lebedeva
Novosibirsk
Competing Interests:
Conflict of interests: The authors declared no potential conflict of interests regarding the research, authorship, and / or publication of this article.
References
1. Ageev N. Yu. Sacredness of Chinese characters. The sacred in traditional East, ed. A. L. Riabinin. Moscow: IOS RAS, 2017, 370–375. (In Russ.)
2. Akbembetova A. E., Mushaeva V. I. Linguistic and cultural interaction of languages with different systems. Vestnik Kalmytskogo universiteta, 2021, (2): 22–28. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/cosger
3. Vasiliev V. P. Analysis of Chinese characters. St. Petersburg: Tip. V. Bezobrazova i Komp., 1898, vol. 2, 159. (In Russ.)
4. Vinogrodskiy B. B. The universal way of thinking. Introduction to the Book of Changes. Moscow: Eksmo, 2014, 224. (In Russ.)
5. Voytishek E. E., Yao Song, Gorshkova A. V. Fortune telling rituals using incense in modern Chinese religious practices. Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology, 2020, 19(4): 25–50. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25205/1818-7919-2020-19-4-25-50
6. Vygotsky L. S. The history of the development of higher mental functions. Moscow: Urait, 2023, 336. (In Russ.)
7. Gao M. On the notches on ceramics and on the origin of Chinese hieroglyphic writing. New in foreign linguistics. Iss. XXII: Linguistics in China, ed. Sofronov M. V. Moscow: Progress, 1989, 299–333. (In Russ.)
8. Gotlib O. M. Fundamentals of grammatology in Chinese writing. 2nd ed. Moscow: VKN, 2020, 314. (In Russ.)
9. Greimas A. J., Courtés J. Semiotics. Explanatory dictionary of language theory. Semiotics, ed. Stepanov Yu. S. Moscow: Raduga, 1983, 483–550. (In Russ.)
10. Eremeev V. Е. Symbols and numbers in the Book of Changes. 2nd ed. Moscow: Ladomir, 2005, 598. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/qtpfyf
11. Zinin S. V. Bu and Shi: Prophetic rituals in the Chun Qiu Epoch. Ethics and ritual in traditional China, ed. Vasiliev L. S. Moscow: Nauka, 1988, 155–172. (In Russ.)
12. Kozhin P. M. Ancient theory and prophetic practices in China. Chinese classical Book of Changes and modern science, ed. Kozhin P. M. Moscow: Luch, 2003, 19–28. (In Russ.)
13. Komkova A. S. Semiotic weakening phenomenon in the Anglo-Saxon linguistic culture in VII–XI centuries. Novosibirsk: NSU, 2017, 170. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/ytlqlk
14. Kryukov V. M. Ritual communication in Ancient China. 2nd ed. Moscow: Pamiatniki ist. mysli, 2012, 399. (In Russ.)
15. Lebedeva D. S. Semiotic weakening of the strong hieroglyphic sign "sun" in the Chinese language. Philology. Theory & Practice, 2023, 16(10): 3280–3286. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30853/phil20230509
16. Morris C. W. Foundations of sign theory. Semiotics, ed. Stepanov Yu. S. Moscow: Raduga, 1983, 37–89. (In Russ.)
17. Peirce С. S. Collected papers. Moscow: Logos, 2000, 411. (In Russ.)
18. Proskurin S. G. Semiotics. Language, Culture, and Law. 2nd ed. St. Petersburg: Lan, 2024, 252. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/kjjnfs
19. Sofronov M. V. Chinese language and Chinese writing. Moscow: AST, 2007, 640. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/qthjqh
20. Tsentner A. S., Khotskina O. V., Ivleva M. A., Kleiman B. M., Proskurina A. V. Cultural transfers: The problems of codes. Novosibirsk: NSU, 2015, 224. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ueqzyz
21. Shchutskii Yu. K. The Chinese classical Book of Changes. Moscow: Nauka, 1993, 629. (In Russ.)
22. Feng L. Research on the formation of Chinese characters. Journal of Neuro Spine, 2023, 1(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-83895/v1
23. Jin X. New interpretation of Western semiotics from the perspective of symbolic concepts in Zhouyi. Language and Semiotic Studies, 2021, 7(1): 57–78. https://doi.org/10.1515/lass-2021-070103
24. Keightley D. N. Sources of Shang history: The oracle-bone inscriptions of Bronze Age China. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978, 281.
25. Handbook on characters teaching for international Chinese teachers, ed. Wang Xiurong. Beijing: Gaodeng jiaoyu chubanshe, 2017, 512. (In Chin.)
Review
For citations:
Lebedeva D.S. Semiotic Weakening Law in Ancient Chinese Writing System and Divinations. SibScript. 2024;26(4):587-596. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/sibscript-2024-26-4-587-596